Toxic Femininity If all mountains of the world had ego...

[svgmn1]

It would be rivalled by the ego mixed race foids have towards their country of origin and it is worse if the foid's country/race of origin is in a lower stat than the other one, these whores usually act completely condescending to their own people.

Worst of all is how these foids think that race is just nothing more or less than a foidish personality traits they can brag about.
like "ooh do people online know I'm a bit maori and half asian half latino?" like no they shouldn't and they shouldn't give a fuck but soyciety is what it is.
I've been trying to figure out what is there to brag about if you're a mixed, say hapa foid for example?

you most likely don't know shit about your culture, or even if you do it is half assed knowledge, they pretend like they're their people, at the same time trying as hard as they can to dissosiate themselves from those people or critiquing them when picking a partner. your existence contributes ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING to your race of origin, if anything, it only helps destroying it.

Trad arab spaces actually have a unique term for these people, not bastards or something
it is actually shameful if you're mixed since it means you're not an arab first and your existence here is marked by shame since your ancestors most likely kissed some tribes ass or did something shameful (exactly like these whores do when they turn their backs on their countrymen). the word for such people is "naghal" which translates to hinny, the hinny is a hybrid that comes from a male horse fucking a female donkey, which is very fitting to describe those bastard whores.

It is worth to note that in contrast, being mixed race as a man usually is a death sentence if they decided to live in the superior foreign race parent's country.

I may hold more hatred in my heart for disapora/mixed with any race foids than foids of other races. these naghal ass foids shouldn't even exist they're an abomination of genetics and evolution and their wombs are rotten.

 

[No escape]

Take the nosa repliyem pill goyim

 

[svgmn1]

Take the nosa repliyem pill goyim

no replies me

 

[Blackpill Monk]

@svgmn1 bro what do you think about Shia clerics of Iraq. Aren't they all Sayyids and descendants of Prophet Mohammed. So aren't they superior to Bedouin Arabs

 

[svgmn1]

@svgmn1 bro what do you think about Shia clerics of Iraq. Aren't they all Sayyids and descendants of Prophet Mohammed. So aren't they superior to Bedouin Arabs

its more like a class divisions/caste that exists in the mid east for both shia and sunnis, however one that shouldn't be overlooked.
there are sayyeds (clerics as you said) and commoners (referred to in arabic as awam).
awam as a description not reserved for shia commoners but for any family/tribe that doesn't have Ali or the his descendants from fatima as ancestry (designated as prophets grandsons)
from a religious standpoint, most sunni sects shove away heritage as an infiltration upon religion, as they think it is specified that there is no difference between men except in piousness ( a hadith directly stating this)
this does has lots of exceptions for both sides, for example not all shias are twelvers/base their beliefs on the importance of the twelver descendants and not all sunnis disregard descendance and caste, a notable example of such exceptions is ironically isis (@GobidMujahid may like to elab here on the topic of why isis enforces the khalif to be an adnani/descendant from quraish/sharif, it is probably due to the fact that all major caliphates belonged to ummayids and hashimites and both are quraish, but it is still suspectable with favoritism towards descendants of the prophet)
from a tribal standpoint, banu hashim (hashimites) are among the strongest and most well respected histroicaly, even without the prophecy/imamhood on their side. however it is atguable, as hashimites are adnani (historically adnanis are second gen arabs, their qahtani counterpart is much much more authentic from an arabian genetic and historic standpoint).

 

[Blackpill Monk]

most sunni sects shove away heritage as an infiltration upon religion, as they think it is specified that there is no difference between men except in piousness

Isn't Arab supremacy is a core part of the Islam. As him Prophet himself said Arabs are the best among the best, superior in taqwa, rest of the ummah will serve Arabs. Both Shia and Sunni believe in the Arabs supremacy, difference is that Shia believes only Hashemites are superior while Sunni believe in the superiority of entire Arab nation/race

 

[Blackpill Monk]

hashimites are adnani (historically adnanis are second gen arabs, their qahtani counterpart is much much more authentic from an arabian genetic and historic standpoint).

Is there any power struggle between Hashemites and Qahtanites

 

[Blackpill Monk]

ummayids and hashimites

What about the non-Arab caliphates

 

[fokusin]

@svgmn1 bro what do you think about Shia clerics of Iraq. Aren't they all Sayyids and descendants of Prophet Mohammed. So aren't they superior to Bedouin Arabs

They are descendants from his cousin

 

[fokusin]

its more like a class divisions/caste that exists in the mid east for both shia and sunnis, however one that shouldn't be overlooked.
there are sayyeds (clerics as you said) and commoners (referred to in arabic as awam).
awam as a description not reserved for shia commoners but for any family/tribe that doesn't have Ali or the his descendants from fatima as ancestry (designated as prophets grandsons)
from a religious standpoint, most sunni sects shove away heritage as an infiltration upon religion, as they think it is specified that there is no difference between men except in piousness ( a hadith directly stating this)

Why do shias force non sayyids to wear white turban

 

[svgmn1]

Why do shias force non sayyids to wear white turban

mainly just to differentiate between them. sayyeds are sometimes held in higher regard even for the same clerical degree.

 

[svgmn1]

They are descendants from his cousin

with his daughter. that is why they're commonly referred to as "grandsons of the prophet" a catchphrase of "the prophet is their grandfather" is often used to signify the lineage of sa'da (plural of sayyed).

 

[svgmn1]

What about the non-Arab caliphates

I don't remember but ottomans and others did manage a semantical workaround for this other than the specified hadith or the quranic verse regarding this topic, certain doctrines were followed by ottomans for example while others were ignored for such reasons.

 

[Blackpill Monk]

Isn't Arab supremacy is a core part of the Islam. As him Prophet himself said Arabs are the best among the best, superior in taqwa, rest of the ummah will serve Arabs. Both Shia and Sunni believe in the Arabs supremacy, difference is that Shia believes only Hashemites are superior while Sunni believe in the superiority of entire Arab nation/race

@svgmn1

 

[svgmn1]

Isn't Arab supremacy is a core part of the Islam.

Politically yes, in scriptures never was.
the verse in al-imran "you were the best among people, enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah" is clearly pointed at muslims as a nation for their actions and beliefs, not specifically arabs, as bilal was one of many amongst them.
the verse which really counters that
"the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted." is way more clear in admitting that god eventually favors people only based on righteousness.

Both Shia and Sunni believe in the Arabs supremacy, difference is that Shia believes only Hashemites are superior while Sunni believe in the superiority of entire Arab nation/race

those are two things mixed with generalizing for both shias and sunnis.
generalizations don't usually work.
what is right: shias will always put more value for ali's lineage, for the twelver imams to be a core part of their religion/sect, the isooli sub-sect of shia islam specifically enforces that believing in imamhood and its traits (isma) is one of the five essential parameters of the islamic religion and so do most sects of shia, isma nearly prophetizes imams, so hashimites are favored for their lineage/linkage to the prophet/ali.

what isn't right: arab superiority.
a large portion of sunnis do believe that hashimites have superior autbority just like shias, for example ashrafs/sharifs in morocco/hijaz/jordan as the ruling family/cleric authority, sufis also strongly favor this concept, it gets weird, but they still don't really concern themselves with arabs being superior.
shias really don't concern themselves with arab being superior or not either, the five main theological parameters and other scriptures really only concern themselves with the twelve imams not arabs as a superior ethnicity.
both sects of islam are literally carried by persian/afgan scholars including the hadith scripture documenters and the theologists.

 

[Blackpill Monk]

Politically yes, in scriptures never was.
the verse in al-imran "you were the best among people, enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah" is clearly pointed at muslims as a nation for their actions and beliefs, not specifically arabs, as bilal was one of many amongst them.
the verse which really counters that
"the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted." is way more clear in admitting that god eventually favors people only based on righteousness.



those are two things mixed with generalizing for both shias and sunnis.
generalizations don't usually work.
what is right: shias will always put more value for ali's lineage, for the twelver imams to be a core part of their religion/sect, the isooli sub-sect of shia islam specifically enforces that believing in imamhood and its traits (isma) is one of the five essential parameters of the islamic religion and so do most sects of shia, isma nearly prophetizes imams, so hashimites are favored for their lineage/linkage to the prophet/ali.

what isn't right: arab superiority.
a large portion of sunnis do believe that hashimites have superior autbority just like shias, for example ashrafs/sharifs in morocco/hijaz/jordan as the ruling family/cleric authority, sufis also strongly favor this concept, it gets weird, but they still don't really concern themselves with arabs being superior.
shias really don't concern themselves with arab being superior or not either, the five main theological parameters and other scriptures really only concern themselves with the twelve imams not arabs as a superior ethnicity.
both sects of islam are literally carried by persian/afgan scholars including the hadith scripture documenters and the theologists.

Well you say politically yes, this means Arab supremacy inseparable part of Islam as Islam is a purely an radical socio-political ideology. Islam in true sense is Arab ethno-supremacist political ideology. As you said Hashemites and descendants of Muhhamed is considered as superior. Also there are many sahih Hadith, where Prophet himself said that Arabs are better and superior, rest of the ummah will serve the Arabs. Caliphs strictly should be from Hashemites/Qurash. Even in earlier caliphates non-Arab muslim are consider as racially and spiritually inferior, non-Arab muslim were even get heavy taxation and stripped of many rights. Islam in early years considered as treasure of Arabs tribes and if any non Arabs has to convert, they have to sponsored by Arabs tribes. Early Caliphates have participated in the destruction of non-Arab culture, non-Arab muslim has to submissive to Arabs muslim and they were treated as lower caste. In modern times, rise of Wahhabism and Salafism has far more intensified the Arabs supremacy.

In fact whether some admit or not, Islam is Arabs Judaism with blend of Nohaidism, in where Arabs Muslims are considered as the choosen people while non-Arab muslim has to submissive to Arabs

 

[svgmn1]

Well you say politically yes, this means Arab supremacy inseparable part of Islam as Islam is a purely an radical socio-political ideology. Islam in true sense is Arab ethno-supremacist political ideology. As you said Hashemites and descendants of Muhhamed is considered as superior. Also there are many sahih Hadith, where Prophet himself said that Arabs are better and superior

the evidence for hadith/quran leaning towards arab superiority is much less than the evidence of piety-based favoring by the islamic god.


O People! Certainly your lord is one, your father is one. An Arab has no virtue over a Non Arab, nor does a Non Arab have virtue over an Arab, a red skinned person is not more virtuous than a dark skinned person nor is a dark skinned person more virtuous than a red skinned person except through Taqwa (taqwa = piety, which reinforces the piety preference mentioned in the earlier quranic text)
-this hadith is agreed upon by both shia and sunni sources.

you will find hadiths that mention why arabs are more special, or tafsirs regarding al-imran verse putting arabs on a pedestal, the problem is al-hujurat quranic verse and the prophets is the strongest of all these texts as it directly addresses on what standard alone does god favor people from others and why god diverted humanity into different races, for the hadith above, it is a hadith from the prophets farewell pilgrimage, one of the most documented event for both shia and sunni sources, and more important and valuable in terms of documentation as an event for shia clerics than sunnis since during that same pilgrimage the prophet ghadir-khumm happened.
hadith also generally scales second to quranic verses in terms of solving a disputed argument.

 

[RandomGuy]

Take the nosa repliyem pill goyim